282 replies to this topic

[Tiamat of the Sea]

But it is a hard cap that is not directly affected by total heat sinks, and the way you talk about it creates the illusion that it is directly affected. This then makes any conversation relating the two games confusing and difficult in a way it doesn't have to be.

Edited by Quickdraw Crobat, 21 April 2015 - 01:00 PM.

[Widowmaker1981]

LordMelvin, on 21 April 2015 - 12:54 PM, said:

RoF quriks on ballistics are fine in most cases, although I'd honestly prefer that the weapon class just get an overall buff instead (RIP AC2s). It's when you give energy weapons massive RoF AND Heat quirks that things get out of hand. I probably should have specified. It's also worth noting that duration quirks count as RoF quirks for energy weapons since it allows them to cycle faster.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that Velocity/Range and Armor/Agility quirks are better than RoF/Heat quirks since they increase the potential effective damage a mech can put out with a given loadout without directly impacting the rate at which that damage is applied.

Yes, ill agree with that, with the caveat that, imo, the more powerful RoF/Heat quirks are needed in some cases to allow IS tech to match clan tech, allowing Clan weaponry to stay slightly superior - imo giving the 'omnimech' flavour of any clan mech being able to be good with any weapon, whereas IS mechs are less flexible, but have more numerous designs.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quickdraw Crobat, on 21 April 2015 - 01:00 PM, said:

But it is a hard cap that is not directly affected by total heat sinks, and the way you talk about it creates the illusion that it is directly affected. This then makes any conversation relating the two games confusing and difficult in a way it doesn't have to be.

You assertion makes no sense, but whatever. Apparently a mech with 22 SHS can't generate more heat than one with 1o despite 22 (or 52) more than 10 (or 40).

Apparently, somewhere in the moment, during a TT turn mechs can overheat before the heat phase. (Because if it can't? It hasn't encountered a "momentary heat cap")

Yup, OK, whatever. Done derailing the thread to have the same thing stated OVER and OVER again.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Functionally speaking, the heat generation and dissipation are simultaneous. So no, they don't overheat before the heat phase because they generated and dissipated that heat at the exact same time as far as anything is concerned.

Again- you say 'heat capacity', you mean 'heat I can generate in a given time period without overheating'. Game says 'heat capacity', it means 'size of the bucket I hold my heat in'. Creates confusion. Your definition includes dissipation, the game's doesn't.

Edited by Quickdraw Crobat, 21 April 2015 - 01:11 PM.

[Lordred]

I agree with Bishop.

Quirks need a major re-work.

[ztac]

One thing that eludes people is that this is a PC game , it is not TT. In all essence they should not have used TT rules as a PC game is totally different!

But then they only used TT wen it suited them , then threw the rules away in other areas! PGI totally missed the idea that maybe they should have invented their own system and implemented it rather than rely on something else and that is most probably the main reason they have such a broken system. They even limited the game by putting LRM in and the way that it works, any rolling plains map of anything remotely flat would just be laughable due to this one fact! Which in turn has limited the type of map they can produce.

But back on topic they really needed to just do a minor overhaul back in beta when it was very close to a workable system (just seemed to be more balanced back then), but obviously as you add more variables to a game you make it harder to balance... something that seems to have escaped PGI!

Edited by ztac, 21 April 2015 - 01:21 PM.

[Kristov Kerensky]

FupDup, on 21 April 2015 - 10:58 AM, said:

The reason we're seeing Puglandia players use more than 1 mech is because PGI has made some modest attempts at balancing the mechs, even if some cases went too far or not far enough.

Even with all of the flaws in PGI's specific choice of quirks, they at least made most of the formerly Tier 5 mechs playable to the point of not automatically losing if somebody on your team chose a Trebuchet instead of a Shadow Hawk. I don't like feeling that my team will lose just because we didn't have enough Mad Cats, I don't want to go back to those days.



This has been argued to death on these forums and still nobody gets it... People try to use the "pilots" scapegoat all the time, saying things like "Oh, but a really good player in a Commando can beat a really bad player in a Timber Wolf!" The flaw with that line of reasoning is that good players and good mechs aren't mutually exclusive (sometimes there's even a direct correlation, at least at the really high levels).

The way to determine the effectiveness of something is to imagine two clones of each other who have the same skills, reflexes, aim, awareness, etc. and pit them against each other (or have two teams of those clones duke it out). Pitting the theoretical mech against a player of drastically lower skill doesn't really prove much, just like why a grown adult shouldn't brag about punching out a toddler.

You are once again doing nothing but saying that all Mechs need to be equal or they are not worth using, therefore make them all equal. They do NOT all need to be equal, matter of fact Russ stated outright that not all Mechs are viable for competitive play, including real world cash only Mechs. This is by design, some Mechs will be meh, some ok, some good, some great.

And using a Tier 5 Mech and having fun in it has nothing to do with superior skill, it has to do with having fun with a Mech that isn't optimal because sometimes that's more fun. THAT is why you see them in Puglandia, because lots of people just want to have fun with a Mech because it speaks to them for whatever reason, nostalgia for BTech games 30 years ago, MW games from 20 to 15 years ago, it LOOKS cool, whatever, it speaks to them so they use it. I have my Urby R60L in my CW dropdeck and I have a blast with it, I used them in TT a long time ago, it brings back fond memories, especially when I'm gutted and dead because a Timberwolf glances in my direction.

Your definition of balance is not what PGI is doing in MWO, it's not ever been done in the BTech TT game or the previous MW video games, ever, and that's always been one of the draws to the game, it's NOT balanced 1 for 1, it's asymmetrical, A does NOT counter B but it might counter D, and C might counter A in certain conditions but it always counters Z which counters B in certain other conditions, etc.

[beerandasmoke]

Not another massive quirkening. Just No. A lot of us who played clanwars lost 10s of millions in the last "stock" quirkening. The player base is low right now and a another quirkening breaking peoples builds across the board would just enrage more people and cause them to leave. Small adjustments to very high performers are all thats needed.

[ShinobiHunter]

I agree that quirks have been a bit overdone. I'm not sure what the solution would be, because really, how many Wolverines or Trebuchets or Dragons did you see before quirks? Quirks are good for mech diversity, but bad for build diversity IMO. Maybe more generalized chassis quirks would help, as opposed to specific weapon quirks?

[Wintersdark]

So many ridiculous extremes and honestly stupid slippery slope arguments in this thread.

Its true that competitive play will always focus primarily on the best mechs and loadouts. That is inevitable.

But the quest for diversity is not at odds with balance. You'll never see perfect balance, both because OMG HARD and because there are simply too man moving parts. But still, you can have reasonable balance where chassis are at least all viable (I used that word deliberately, as opposed to optimal) for regular PUG play - which is still likely the largest segment of play.

If, instead of the Tier 1-5 we had, we end up with mechs all at the "Tier 1-3" level, then that's great

This is NOT a step towards "all mechs being the same". Just fixing the worst mechs so they're at least just "meh" instead of "thanks for screwing your team".

As Fup said above, don't bring pilots into it, as it's not like only bad pilots drive Timberwolves. While there are some out there who want to pilot objectively bad mechs because Reasons, this is still a multiplayermultiplayer competitive PvP game. Balance is important, as is diversity.

Thankfully, we have MANY avenues for diversity beyond power level.

[Night Thastus]

This post makes me hate myself because I agree with it so much. I said from the start quirks shouldn't go past 25%, and here we are with 50% (and above) quirks. I think it's wrong.

I'd like to go to a max 25% quirk, one quirk per tier. This crap has gotten rediculous. This post should have a poll for that.

As well, it makes me realize just how much I wish this game was different. I have a giant ass list on the forums of things I wish would change, but I'm starting to give up hope. I don't want to. I've sunk over 200$ into this game, and it's the only modern battletech game we'll get but...I don't know.

This isn't a democracy. We can't really vote on changes. We can throw them suggestions, and "vote" with our wallets, but it's limited at best.

I want to keep playing. I really want to remain hopeful, but I'm just not sure anymore. There's too much backwards movement to stop it and reverse it now. We'd need huge changes to get this game back up to snuff.

Edited by Night Thastus, 21 April 2015 - 03:42 PM.

[Ultimax]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 April 2015 - 07:33 AM, said:

So yes, I treat your posts as the hostile attacks in sheep clothing they tend to be.

Then I guess I'll treat yours as the product of a dishonest poster with a perpetual chip on their shoulder who flies off the handle when anyone dares disagree with him.


I asked a simple question, and you couldn't even put together a civil answer.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 21 April 2015 - 03:48 PM.

[Johny Rocket]

Sorry if this has already been covered but Im not reading 10 pages to respond to OP
Bishop I can prove your point for you right here Range Quirks.

Orion VA missile range +25% in a mech that is a dud for brawling because most of its weapons are in the arms. You can shoot lrms at a crazy high arc from behind cover. Purpose built boat. 1250m lrm range has nothing to do with this mech under performing.

Edited by Tractor Joe, 21 April 2015 - 04:06 PM.

[destroika]

We, the public, saw this coming a while back. Why can't the Devs?

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

I said it before, I'll simply copy and paste it now:

"Quirk balancing is very micro. From where the balance was, it's like trying to chop a redwood tree with a surgeon scapulae. Overall, however, I think they've at least taken a step in the right direction for the moment, but they really do need to come up with a more permanent balancing solution. before this gets out of hand. "
- 02/19/15

We're now there at that "out of hand" moment. So about that more permanent solution?

Edited by destroika, 21 April 2015 - 04:15 PM.

[Xetelian]

Stefka Kerensky, on 20 April 2015 - 11:23 PM, said:

And why, in your opinion.
I don't like Dragon for its creapy CT hitbox, for instance.
So, logic would suggest to fix....hitboxes.

Without the machinegun fast AC5s this mech is complete trash. Changing the hitboxes can only accomplish so much...and not enough to make this mech go from bad to good.

Weapon quirks, even the really high ones, still haven't done enough for many of the chassis that need help.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...b8371891dee6dcb

28 Alpha and 4 DPS (though I don't think the DPS means anything).

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...0cfe904f82c561d

28 Alpha 5 DPS and 4 JJs.

Same engines
Without the quirks for the AC 5 the dragon can't perform on the level of a Cataphract with Ultra AC5s.
With quirks the AC5 fires as fast as the 2 Ultra AC5s would double tapped bringing the dragon up to the Cataphract level.

If it had great Laser bonuses to go with the AC bonus it'd be even better.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...0ab970a8c8d2575

32 Alpha 5 DPS with 2 JJs.

Ultimately we want all 3 to pack similar power, level the playing field a little to give every mech a chance.

These quirks for the DRG are now essential and should be since it can't compete at 60 tons with 70 and 75 ton mechs.

Power creep is a necessary evil if we want more available options for what Heavy to bring.


I'm talking exclusively about PUG queue and not clan war where weight is a factor.

[Quaamik]

Personally, I like the quirks system.

Ideally, I think the quirks should be aimed at the stock build for a variant, making it playable without customization even as it matches historical TT specs. Then the generic quirks (say for ANY energy on an energy hard point, vs the one that it was originally equipped with) should help give a flavor to the mech & variant. Such that a mech intended as a brawler should be easy to play as a brawler in stock config, or could ne modified into a brawler that better suited a players taste, but would not work nearly as well built as a sniper.

For some mechs, that's going to mean quirks that seriously buff certain aspects. Remember, the mechs actual "look" was an artistic thing, not an "engineered to survive battle" thing. Some of the designs (Awesome for example) are walking targets. Without quirks and buffs the design is going to be so hampered its unusable.

[TLBFestus]

Almond Brown, on 21 April 2015 - 10:47 AM, said:

And what "real issue" might that be? That not all Mechs, in the same weight class, are created the same? Perhaps you have a FIX for that you wish to share?

In my opinion?

I have no idea why you seem so hostile or smug in response to my comment, so I will ignore it's tone, but in response, well let's see what "real issues" we can come up with;

- ghost heat
- convergence
- ECM
- Heat Scale
- etc...etc...etc....

Note that all of the above affect core game play, not just individual mechs. Those, core game play issues, are the real issues. PGI has begun tossing quirks around like confetti in order to balance the game when they should be addressing core issues.

As Bishop said much earlier, "You can apply band-aid over band-aid but that doesn't stop the victim from bleeding out" ( not an exact quote, but close enough).

I'm not saying they are doing a horrible job, matter of fact you have to have some appreciation for all the balls they are juggling to even approach "balance" in the game. The problem is they are so busy juggling (and selling mechs) that they don't have time to look at and fix core issues.

Maybe one day, if the game is around long enough, they will present us with a whole new engine and mechanics addressed from the ground up rather than building on mistakes (that I somehow think are "hard coded" into the game at this point).

[Khobai]

I like the quirks system too. But the failing of the quirk system is that it rewards meta builds much more than stock builds.

The Stalker 4N is a prime example. It rewards large laser boating. Instead of rewarding a mix of lasers/SRMs/LRMs. Stalkers are NOT energy boats. Theyre mixed weapon platforms.

[Telmasa]

I love you, Bishop Steiner, and I love this thread.

Alot of this problem (if nobody has pointed it out yet) also has to do with how mechs are ranked in 'usefulness'...the "five-tier" system has borked up just as much of the balance as the quirks themselves. It's severely flawed and narrowminded, because it's born out of the viewpoint of the "metaderp" mindset, as opposed to a viewpoint that considers ALL mechs, ALL their characeristics, ALL the time - not according to the "meta" flavor of the month.

Mechs need to be balanced by their tonnage bracket - I call it "performance-by-tonnage".

Locusts? Judge them according to other 20-25 ton mechs. And that's it.

Atlai? Judge them according to other 95-100 ton mechs. And that's it.

Stormcrows? Judge them according to other 50-60 ton mechs. And that's it.

Mechs should not be able to weigh *half* the tonnage of other mechs - and still have the same, and oftentimes better. burst & sustained DPS. (Grid Iron vs King Crab case in point.)

(Whether or not to include IS vs Clan entirely with this system, I don't know.)


Before the quirkening happened, I remembering seeing a player named "This Machine" rocking a dual AC5 Dragon-1N (remember, before quirks!) and he was kicking butt and taking names. It looked really cool, and made me want to pick one up.

I picked it up just in time for the quirkening, and was apalled at how stupidly OP it has become. It goes beyond "easy" mode, it's just inexcusable. I actually sold the Dragon-1N because it was so overwhelmingly 'good' that it wasn't fun to play anymore, all the challenge was gone. I wasn't able to do what "This Machine" was doing, because I was obliterating anything I could get my guns on.

Now, I do realize most players aren't as picky or idealistic as me and have no problem playing "easy" mode - hence, all the premade teams that run around with nothing but Stalker4ns, Dragon1Ns, Thunderbolt5SS's, and Firestarter-S's (or other similarly quirked mechs) in CW - but that's what breaks games apart. If there's no balance to it, there's no true competition to be had, and there's no fun in it - it's simply another "follow the bandwagon" game, just like 'noobtubing' on Call of Duty or 'Zerg Rushing' on the original Starcraft.

Players both are unable and unwilling to fix things themselves, though, so it's all up to PGI to steer things back off of this bumpy road.

Edited by Telmasa, 21 April 2015 - 05:37 PM.

[Sigilum Sanctum]

Please don't take my super tanky Zeus away from me